mirror of
https://github.com/FEX-Emu/linux.git
synced 2025-01-13 04:41:17 +00:00
iwlwifi: fix in-column rate scaling
This patch fixes cases that the code raised or didn't decrease the rate although the success ratio was not good. Signed-off-by: Guy Cohen <guy.cohen@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Tomas Winkler <tomas.winkler@intel.com> Signed-off-by: John W. Linville <linville@tuxdriver.com>
This commit is contained in:
parent
f20217d9d5
commit
a5e8b5056e
@ -1336,7 +1336,7 @@ static int rs_move_legacy_other(struct iwl_priv *priv,
|
||||
lq_sta->search_better_tbl = 1;
|
||||
goto out;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
break;
|
||||
case IWL_LEGACY_SWITCH_SISO:
|
||||
IWL_DEBUG_RATE("LQ: Legacy switch to SISO\n");
|
||||
|
||||
@ -1422,9 +1422,9 @@ static int rs_move_siso_to_other(struct iwl_priv *priv,
|
||||
lq_sta->search_better_tbl = 1;
|
||||
goto out;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
break;
|
||||
case IWL_SISO_SWITCH_MIMO2:
|
||||
IWL_DEBUG_RATE("LQ: SISO switch to MIMO\n");
|
||||
IWL_DEBUG_RATE("LQ: SISO switch to MIMO2\n");
|
||||
memcpy(search_tbl, tbl, sz);
|
||||
search_tbl->is_SGI = 0;
|
||||
search_tbl->ant_type = ANT_AB; /*FIXME:RS*/
|
||||
@ -1689,6 +1689,7 @@ static void rs_rate_scale_perform(struct iwl_priv *priv,
|
||||
u8 active_tbl = 0;
|
||||
u8 done_search = 0;
|
||||
u16 high_low;
|
||||
s32 sr;
|
||||
#ifdef CONFIG_IWL4965_HT
|
||||
u8 tid = MAX_TID_COUNT;
|
||||
#endif
|
||||
@ -1864,6 +1865,8 @@ static void rs_rate_scale_perform(struct iwl_priv *priv,
|
||||
low = high_low & 0xff;
|
||||
high = (high_low >> 8) & 0xff;
|
||||
|
||||
sr = window->success_ratio;
|
||||
|
||||
/* Collect measured throughputs for current and adjacent rates */
|
||||
current_tpt = window->average_tpt;
|
||||
if (low != IWL_RATE_INVALID)
|
||||
@ -1871,19 +1874,22 @@ static void rs_rate_scale_perform(struct iwl_priv *priv,
|
||||
if (high != IWL_RATE_INVALID)
|
||||
high_tpt = tbl->win[high].average_tpt;
|
||||
|
||||
/* Assume rate increase */
|
||||
scale_action = 1;
|
||||
scale_action = 0;
|
||||
|
||||
/* Too many failures, decrease rate */
|
||||
if ((window->success_ratio <= IWL_RATE_DECREASE_TH) ||
|
||||
(current_tpt == 0)) {
|
||||
if ((sr <= IWL_RATE_DECREASE_TH) || (current_tpt == 0)) {
|
||||
IWL_DEBUG_RATE("decrease rate because of low success_ratio\n");
|
||||
scale_action = -1;
|
||||
|
||||
/* No throughput measured yet for adjacent rates; try increase. */
|
||||
} else if ((low_tpt == IWL_INVALID_VALUE) &&
|
||||
(high_tpt == IWL_INVALID_VALUE))
|
||||
scale_action = 1;
|
||||
(high_tpt == IWL_INVALID_VALUE)) {
|
||||
|
||||
if (high != IWL_RATE_INVALID && sr >= IWL_RATE_INCREASE_TH)
|
||||
scale_action = 1;
|
||||
else if (low != IWL_RATE_INVALID)
|
||||
scale_action = -1;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
/* Both adjacent throughputs are measured, but neither one has better
|
||||
* throughput; we're using the best rate, don't change it! */
|
||||
@ -1899,9 +1905,10 @@ static void rs_rate_scale_perform(struct iwl_priv *priv,
|
||||
/* Higher adjacent rate's throughput is measured */
|
||||
if (high_tpt != IWL_INVALID_VALUE) {
|
||||
/* Higher rate has better throughput */
|
||||
if (high_tpt > current_tpt)
|
||||
if (high_tpt > current_tpt &&
|
||||
sr >= IWL_RATE_INCREASE_TH) {
|
||||
scale_action = 1;
|
||||
else {
|
||||
} else {
|
||||
IWL_DEBUG_RATE
|
||||
("decrease rate because of high tpt\n");
|
||||
scale_action = -1;
|
||||
@ -1914,23 +1921,17 @@ static void rs_rate_scale_perform(struct iwl_priv *priv,
|
||||
IWL_DEBUG_RATE
|
||||
("decrease rate because of low tpt\n");
|
||||
scale_action = -1;
|
||||
} else
|
||||
} else if (sr >= IWL_RATE_INCREASE_TH) {
|
||||
scale_action = 1;
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
/* Sanity check; asked for decrease, but success rate or throughput
|
||||
* has been good at old rate. Don't change it. */
|
||||
if (scale_action == -1) {
|
||||
if ((low != IWL_RATE_INVALID) &&
|
||||
((window->success_ratio > IWL_RATE_HIGH_TH) ||
|
||||
if ((scale_action == -1) && (low != IWL_RATE_INVALID) &&
|
||||
((sr > IWL_RATE_HIGH_TH) ||
|
||||
(current_tpt > (100 * tbl->expected_tpt[low]))))
|
||||
scale_action = 0;
|
||||
|
||||
/* Sanity check; asked for increase, but success rate has not been great
|
||||
* even at old rate, higher rate will be worse. Don't change it. */
|
||||
} else if ((scale_action == 1) &&
|
||||
(window->success_ratio < IWL_RATE_INCREASE_TH))
|
||||
scale_action = 0;
|
||||
|
||||
switch (scale_action) {
|
||||
@ -1959,7 +1960,7 @@ static void rs_rate_scale_perform(struct iwl_priv *priv,
|
||||
"high %d type %d\n",
|
||||
index, scale_action, low, high, tbl->lq_type);
|
||||
|
||||
lq_update:
|
||||
lq_update:
|
||||
/* Replace uCode's rate table for the destination station. */
|
||||
if (update_lq) {
|
||||
rate = rate_n_flags_from_tbl(tbl, index, is_green);
|
||||
|
Loading…
x
Reference in New Issue
Block a user